4.3 Article

CXCL4-induced plaque macrophages can be specifically identified by co-expression of MMP7+S100A8+ in vitro and in vivo

期刊

INNATE IMMUNITY
卷 21, 期 3, 页码 255-265

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1753425914526461

关键词

Atherosclerosis; cell differentiation; chemokines; inflammation; macrophages

资金

  1. Innovation Fund FRONTIER (University of Heidelberg)
  2. DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research)
  3. BMBF (German Ministry of Education and Research)
  4. DFG (German Research Foundation) [SFB938/TP Z2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Macrophage heterogeneity in human atherosclerotic plaques has been recognized; however, markers for unequivocal identification of some subtypes are lacking. We found that the platelet chemokine CXCL4 induces a unique macrophage phenotype, which we proposed to call M4'. Here, we sought to identify suitable markers that identify M4 macrophages invitro and invivo. Using a stringent algorithm, we identified a set of potential markers from transcriptomic data derived from polarized macrophages. We specifically focused on matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)7 and S100A8, the co-expression of which has not been described in any macrophage type thus far. We found dose- and time-dependent MMP7 and S100A8 expression in M4 macrophages at the gene and protein levels. CXCL4-induced up-regulation of both MMP7 and S100A8 was curbed in the presence of heparin, which binds to CXCL4 and glycosaminoglycans, most likely representing the macrophage receptor for CXCL4. Immunofluorescence of post-mortem atherosclerotic coronary arteries identified CD68(+)MMP7(+), CD68(+)MMP7(-), CD68(+)S100A8(+) and CD68(+)S100A8(-) macrophages. A small proportion of MMP7(+)S100A8(+) macrophages most likely represent M4 macrophages. In summary, we have identified co-expression of MMP7 and S100A8 to be a marker combination exclusively found in M4 macrophages. This finding may allow further dissection of the role of M4 macrophages in atherosclerosis and other pathologic conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据